for anything outside of PDSG/PDSL its SPO-10.
1 Like
Some PDs might have been fitted with SPO-15
1 Like
Oof.
Well i cant imagine BR this would be balanced at.
Flight performance wise, id imagine it would be uncatchable for lot of older planes.
Armenr wise, i cant see its radar missiles being good, even against tomcats at high alts.
+1
I can see it working at maybe 11.3/11.7 or 12.0 area provided it gets SPO-15 and CMs.
This 405 error is starting to get annoying…
Those would be done by or for export customers and thus not applicable to a VVS or PVO aircraft. Hence why the one off experimental aircraft of PDSG/PDSL are my vote for implementation.
1 Like
Remember, realistic stats have nothing to do with in-game stats. Particularly when it comes to missiles.
I say the R-40R/T should have 15Gs, while the R-40RD/TD should have 20Gs. With Phoenix being just a little better in all variants.
1 Like
I’d argue this little detail should be quietly overlooked, as it might get in the way of countermeasures as well.
What BR would this be?? it has a crazy powerful enegine and can push beyound Mach 3 on high attitude if i remember correctly.
You really think 9.0s should see a foxbat with R60s and countermeasures?
Maybe 11.0, alongside the 104G? seems like a fair enough comparison to me
1 Like
The mirage f1C (not the CT) has an even worse rwr and its at 12.0, and i heard the flight performance of the mig25 is actually pretty bad under like 8k meters (very draggy and sluggish) so i could see it being around 11.0
Don’t see why you can compare this to a Mirage F1C… The only reason the F1 is 12.0 is the Magic 2+ radar missile set. MiG-25 is really weak in the flight performance department due to its weight (built with mostly nickel/steel if I recall correctly)
Make it 11.3 with R-40 Missles. Both R-40R and R-40T
Just saying bad rwr doesn’t mean that much, it has flares, can carry usable missiles so just needs to be put at a br where its speed at the fighting altitudes is fast enough compared to what it faces (eg f104)
It’s going to be among the slowest accelerating of the afterburning aircraft while not going to be able to turn well.
F-4C runs a slightly better kit of AIM-7Ds and AIM-9Es for the loss of countermeasures while accelerating faster.
F-104G is superior to Mig-25 having a vastly higher TWR along with better maneuverability and weapons.
@simsimkek
F-104G is significantly faster than Mig-25.
The altitudes Mig-25 needs to go 2.8 is unachievable in a PVP situation, and with its low acceleration, it’s going to struggle.
If Mig-25 was 11.0, it’d be the worst 11.0 in the game. Mig-23M is significantly better in that situation.
A strategic bomber interceptor does not make for great air RB fighter.
Somehow I doubt its acceleration will be that bad. Sure you won’t be achieving mach 2.8 very often but nothing around that BR is getting close. 10.7 is viable because then you mostly avoid the 12.0s which would be mostly untouchable. 10.0 with 4 R-60s and that ridiculous speed, with countermeasures would mean everything in the 9.0-10.0 would have a horrible time
1 Like
Its TWR with 9 minutes of afterburning fuel and 2x R-40s with 4x R-60s is 0.7 rounded up.
The Phantom with full fuel load is 0.8 while having better agility, a better gun, and the 11.0 one in Japan has as good IR missiles and significantly better radar missiles.
R-60s/9Js are not as good as you think on bad platforms.
Images added.
1 Like
But they’re not just basic R-60s but R-60Ms.